I wrote this in response to a great deal of discussion that occurred on my Facebook Timeline in response to my post about the very recent legalization of same-sex marriage in Utah. I just wanted to make sure everyone had a chance to see my beliefs. Enjoy, keep the discussion going – we should all exercise our right to free speech:

First, I want to say that I respect everyone’s right to his or her own opinion. Each person has a right to say the things they want to say and to support or oppose whatever they would like.

That being said, I absolutely do believe that human rights and equality, under the federal law of these United States, do include the right to marriage if anyone so chooses. There should be legal rights appropriated to all couples that wish to sanction their partnership, heterosexual or homosexual. This nation’s foundations were built upon equality for all men. The times have changed.

In Utah, where the definitional ideals of traditional marriage have morphed from polygamous unions as well as other marriage contracts to what we have today, where do we go wrong when we challenge the legal arrangements of our social convictions.

To argue that nature deems such unions as criminal, in my opinion, is completely against any humanistic ideal. In the end, it isn’t whether you can marry your dog or your third wife. That was never the point of the argument and to compare those types of unions to same-sex marriage equality unions is low at best.

Personally, I have too many very important people in my life to ever think that they deserve less – under any circumstances.

I do respect religious beliefs, without a doubt. I think they are an integral part of the human experience. But, they should have no real sway in the binding legality of the federal government. One person’s personal beliefs about natural law should never be able to condemn so many others to a life less fulfilled. In the end, these laws provide the opportunity for equality – it does not force anyone to marry, it only provides the option.

Keeping the debate open and constructive is important, but I think all arguments must be constructive and sensible.

In the end, it is important to understand that this is a deeply personal argument on all sides. In the end, we must ask ourselves if our beliefs are the most important, or if we are selfless enough to allow for other beliefs to become a part of the political paradigm that fully realizes the humanity of the situation.

We're glad to give readers a forum to express their points of view on issues important to this community. That forum is the “Letters to the Editor.” Letters to the editor may be submitted directly to The Times-Independent through this link and will be published in the print edition of the newspaper. All letters must be the original work of the letter writer – form letters will not be accepted. All letters must include the actual first and last name of the letter writer, the writer’s address, city and state and telephone number. Anonymous letters will not be accepted.

Letters may not exceed 400 words in length, must be regarding issues of general interest to the community, and may not include personal attacks, offensive language, ethnic or racial slurs, or attacks on personal or religious beliefs. Letters should focus on a single issue. Letters that proselytize or focus on theological debates will not be published. During political campaigns, The Times-Independent will not publish letters supporting or opposing any local candidate. Thank you letters are generally not accepted for publication unless the letter has a public purpose. Thank you letters dealing with private matters that compliment or complain about a business or individual will not be published. Nor will letters listing the names of individuals and/or businesses that supported a cause or event. Thank you letters about good Samaritan acts will be considered at the discretion of the newspaper.